I expect him to be LLM curious.

If he has influence it is because we concede it to him (and I have to say that I think he has worked to earn that).

He could say nothing of course but it's clear that is not his personality—he seems to enjoy helping to bridge the gap between the LLM insiders and researchers and the rest of us that are trying to keep up (…with what the hell is going on).

And I suspect if any of us were in his shoes, we would get deluged with people who are constantly engaging us, trying to illicit our take on some new LLM outcrop, turn of events. It would be hard to stay silent.

We construct a circus around everything, that's the nature of human attention :), why are people so surprised by pop compsci when pop physics has been around forever.

This doesn't seem to be promoting every new monstrosity?

"m definitely a bit sus'd to run OpenClaw specifically - giving my private data/keys to 400K lines of vibe coded monster that is being actively attacked at scale is not very appealing at all. Already seeing reports of exposed instances, RCE vulnerabilities, supply chain poisoning, malicious or compromised skills in the registry, it feels like a complete wild west and a security nightmare. But I do love the concept and I think that just like LLM agents were a new layer on top of LLMs, Claws are now a new layer on top of LLM agents, taking the orchestration, scheduling, context, tool calls and a kind of persistence to a next level.

Looking around, and given that the high level idea is clear, there are a lot of smaller Claws starting to pop out."

LLMs alone may not deliver, but LLMs wrapped in agentic harnesses most certainly do.

so what's your point? he should just not get involved in the most discussed topic in the last month and highest growth OS project?